Collaborative objections?

This is apparently the first test of the 2012 planning rule objection process for forest plan revisions (though the plans were prepared under the 1982 rule).  On the Kootenai, there were 38 objectors and the same number of ‘interested persons’ (presumably some overlap).  On the Idaho Panhandle, 22 objectors and 94 interested persons.  Someone distilled that to these four topics for discussion and possible resolution at a meeting on each forest:  county coordination, Wild and Scenic Rivers, recommended Wilderness and wilderness study areas, and management indicator species.  Meetings with objectors are optional, but if held must be open to the public (interested persons can participate but the general public can’t).  The reviewing officer, Associate Deputy Chief Jim Pena, attended in person.  What do you think?

6 Comments

  1. Toby, I think you can dredge around on the KNF website in the planning subpages and find all the guck you want. Last fall I was able to find some PDFs of various comments made on the KNF plan proposal.

    • Yep, there it all is. I looked at the list and while I haven’t dived in (I should be in a good mood for the coming weekend, not depressed), the names made me laugh. Not a single surprise.

  2. Who wants to bet that few, if any, of the objectors want to either recognize another objector’s perspective, let alone seek common ground? IMO, the entire planning process, and all the public input that went into it, which has been completed up to this point will be hashed out in this time-limited objection period. Balancing the disparate opinions on choosing which land uses should occur on public lands has to be one of the most thankless jobs I know.

    • Yes, Tony, and if it’s litigated, all the process and public input will be rehashed once again, only most of the public will be left out. Oh and attorneys will be doing the ultimate agreements (one of the risks being that there might be useful solutions to disagreements that they don’t think of due to their backgrounds).

      Makes me hanker for Andy’s KISS planning rule.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *